Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Guest040616 · 01-08-2013, 04:20 AM

That Guy V. deserves to be in the Basketball Hall of Fame.

Eat 'em up!

http://blog.chron.com/cougars/2013/0...-hall-of-fame/

LexusLover · 01-08-2013, 04:50 AM

BT, you're an alum, and I got no clout there from my post-grad work there, but someone needs to "visit" with them about the visible "seat belt" on a publicity photo ...

.... they could really do a better job of concealing the thing and showing more respect to who is obviously deserving of it. Just saying.

(Please do not take the above comment as criticism of the man at all or you.)

Guest040616 · 01-08-2013, 05:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LexusLover

BT, you're an alum, and I got no clout there from my post-grad work there, but someone needs to "visit" with them about the visible "seat belt" on a publicity photo ...

.... they could really do a better job of concealing the thing and showing more respect to who is obviously deserving of it. Just saying.

(Please do not take the above comment as criticism of the man at all or you.)

No offense taken, I noticed it myself!

They could have easily hid the seat belt with Guy V. holding his (ever present) red & white, polka dot towel. No one would have thought a thing about it!

I thought it was also strange that the "Big E" and Don Chaney were not included in the publicity photo.

It is an absolute travesty Guy V. was not put in the HOF twenty years ago!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Lewis

Guest123018-4 · 01-08-2013, 05:44 AM

Not having him in the hall of fame is not surprising considering the treatment our town gets from the media. It is disgraceful that he has not been inducted a long time ago.

Jackie S · 01-08-2013, 06:06 AM

Big Tex, the problem with Guy V is the entire "Cougar High" syndrome that has plagued the U of H ever since I can remember.
The simple fact is that the National News and Sports Writers simply think that Guy was just a mediocre coach who happen to score some future Hall of Famers for a few years.
While Houston was totally captivated by the entire 'Phi Slamma Jamma' era, it really did not sit that well with the more established National Figures. I doubt he will go in. That bunch can be very unforgiving.

LexusLover · 01-08-2013, 06:14 AM

I can recall the years during which U of H was not "allowed" in the SW Conference, and I believe, BT can correct me, it was the first major college in Texas to have a Black football player on the team [running back ... name?], which I felt was probably the "behind-the-scene" reason for not allowing U of H into the conference ... also .. the team was a strong contender ... and ..

....... usually around here (Texas) football dictates policy.... ..... news and otherwise.....(just my opinion) .....

.... any Friday Night in Texas in the Fall will confirm that!

Guest040616 · 01-08-2013, 08:51 PM

The African American running back referenced by LL was Warren McVea (San Antonio). He was closely followed by another African American running back (from Lufkin, I believe) named Paul Gipson. McVea was the first African American recruited by a major university in Texas. If you told me he was also the first AA in the Deep South I would not dispute it!

Regarding Jackie's assertion of UH being Cougar High. I do not believe that to be a national nickname. I have never had one person from outside of the Houston area refer to me as a Cougar High alum. However, you hear it all of the time in the Houston area. I just shrug it off.

Truth be known, I believe the term Cougar High to be more of a reflection of the success the UH athetic department (in all sports) had in recruiting inner city atheletes from HISD and other Houston area High School's (thus the nickname Cougar High). For example, other than Olajuwon, most of the players recuited by Guy V who played on those Final Four teams in the 1980's were either from HISD or the surrounding area. Local players such as: Clyde Drexler, Michael Young, Reid Gettys, David Rose, Larry Micheaux, Cadillac Anderson, Rob Williams, Alvin Franklin and Ricky Winslow made up the nucleus of Guy V's Phi Slama Jama teams that went to Final Fours in '82, '83 and '84.

Yssup Rider · 01-08-2013, 08:54 PM

Yep.

McVea had problems holding on to the ball. But did play a few years on the NFL.

Gipson was a bruiser who nearly beat UT singlehandedly in 1968. sadly he died of an OD and never got to share his talent with the nation!

.the 1972 UH hoops terms were as good as anyone in the decade. Dwight Jones, Louis Dunbar, Maurice Pressley, Jerry Bonney and Steve Newsome. 29-2 and ranked number 2, before choking in the first round to SW Louisiana.

Guest040616 · 01-08-2013, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

.the 1972 UH hoops terms were as good as anyone in the decade. Dwight Jones, Louis Dunbar, Maurice Pressley, Jerry Bonney and Steve Newsome. 29-2 and ranked number 2, before choking in the first round to SW Louisiana.

Louis Dunbar went on to become better known as "Sweet" Lou Dunbar and spent almost 30 years playing for the Harlem Globetrotters!

Yssup Rider · 01-08-2013, 09:10 PM

And a longtime friend! Still keep,up with each others!

Guest040616 · 01-08-2013, 10:13 PM

I am certain that Guy V would agree.

Eat 'em up!

gnadfly · 01-08-2013, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigtex

.... Local players such as: Clyde Drexler, Michael Young, Reid Gettys, David Rose, Larry Micheaux, Cadillac Anderson, Rob Williams, Alvin Franklin and Ricky Winslow made up the nucleus of Guy V's Phi Slama Jama teams that went to Final Fours in '82, '83 and '84.

And never won the National Championship. I think you provided the case why Guy V. isn't in the HOF. Like many national HOFs, no "ring" no induction. Fair? Probably not.

Your title is misleading, it IS politics.

Guest040616 · 01-09-2013, 02:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gnadfly

And never won the National Championship. I think you provided the case why Guy V. isn't in the HOF. Like many national HOFs, no "ring" no induction.

Thank you Turdfly for your expert analysis, even if flawed!

Using Turdfly's "no 'ring' no induction" as the basic criteria for admission of a player and/or coach into the Basketball Hall of Fame. Will someone please explain to me how Ralph Sampson and Reggie Miller became HOF inductees in 2012. How many "rings" on the collegiate and/or professional level did they win? Or did Ralph and Reggie win a "ring" on the playground that I am unaware of?

Could it be that the "no 'ring' no induction" criteria is a Turdfly only standard that is not uniformly applied by the Basketball Hall of Fame selection committee? Surely Turdy couldn't be wrong! Or could he? Hmmmmmmm?

LexusLover · 01-09-2013, 05:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigtex

Thank you Turdfly for your expert analysis, even if flawed!

Could it be that the "no 'ring' no induction" criteria is a Turdfly only standard that is not uniformly applied by the Basketball Hall of Fame selection committee? Surely Turdy couldn't be wrong! Or could he? Hmmmmmmm?

BT, this is "your thread" ... and as such I presume you can set the tone, which I thought you did. It is "somewhat" disappointing that you would be the FIRST to start the "name calling" and "ridiculing," but ... "this is your thread."

Personally, I thought it refreshing that "ole foe" could have a civilized discourse on a topic, but the "fresh air" has been dispersed, thanks to you.

On the substance of Gnad's observation and your response, it does appear that between the two of you there is flushed out the reason or basis, if not reasonable, for the past failures, if not delays, in annointing one with that cherished title. Politics.

#1 whenever a vote is taken there is usually a element of "politics" in the presentation ramping up to the vote and in the vote itself.
#2: whenever there are unexplained variances in the "presentation" and the subject of the vote that are seemingly inconsistent, politics is lurking in the background.

College sports, and in this part of the country particularly football, IS political, and just the FACT that the President of the United States from time-to-time invites teams to the WH for a photo-op demonstrates that political nature of sports generally.

No example demonstates that conflict more (to me at least) than the "debate" over adding a deck to Memorial stadium in Austin (as opposed to moving the stadium to a site off campus [in the Barton Springs area was one such spot], and the objection of LBJ to the upper deck blocking "his" view of the Hill Country from the LBJ school across the street. Coach Royal won the "debate" and the rest of the story was history....even though Lyndon had some "friends" on the Board of Regents.

A coach from U of H who deserves to be in the HOF, but is turned down, and then re-considered at a latter date could well be the victim of "politics" ... and the existence or non-existence of a "ring" could be a "justification" for the decision, even though there were others who lacked "rings" but were inducted with that honor ... and their acceptance was justified on some "higher" basis that was considered "more important."

Right or wrong. That's marbles.

Guest040616 · 01-09-2013, 06:00 AM

Don't read too much into the back and forth between Turdy and I. You should know that he and I have about as much experience in the name-calling game as any two posters in this forum! Historically, he fires as many shots in my direction as I do in his. It's more the nature of the beast as opposed to a one time shot across the bow!!

As for the tone, Turdy tried to change that when he accused me of a "misleading" title. There was nothing misleading about the title. My original reference was to setting the "politics" aside for a brief moment. Meaning that most of the discussion in this forum has been political in nature, as in Democrats and Republicans, not sports. I believe most people understood that my reference was not to the "politics" unique to American sports.

It wasn't a misleading title! You seemed to have an excellent grasp upon the intended meaning. Didn't you LL?

Setting name-calling aside, did you find Gnadfly's (are you happy now????) "no ring no induction" analysis to be flawed? I certainly did and pointed out a couple of prime examples from last years group of inductees alone. I strongly suspect, there are many more similar examples (no ring but still inducted) from prior years.